Recently on Cyclingnews.com

Letters to Cyclingnews - June 30, 2006, part 2

Here's your chance to get more involved with Cyclingnews. Comments and
criticism on current stories, races, coverage and anything cycling related
are welcomed, even pictures if you wish. Letters should be brief (less
than 300 words), with the sender clearly identified. They may be edited
for space and clarity; please stick to one topic per letter. We will normally
include your name and place of residence, but not your email address unless
you specify in the message.

Recent events have inspired a huge volume of mail this week, so we have
not one but two letters pages for you. Events in Spain and the fall-out
from Operation Puerto have meant that some of these letters reflect the
Tour de France that everyone expected, rather than the Tour without Ullrich
that was announced just as we posted these pages. We have chosen not to
pull those letters as they're honest expressions of people's feelings
earlier this week - but no doubt Ullrich's fans are bitterly disappointed.

Ullrich and the Tour

It would really be great if Ullrich won the Tour this year. He
would deserve it. Whatever all the Jan-bashers say about the waste
of his talent through inadequate preparation for the Tour, surely
no one would disagree that once the race starts, he has never failed
to give less than everything. Basso will have more chances and has
his big win for the year already. Can Ullrich do it? Let's expect
him to take time out of Basso in the two long time-trials - between
2 and 4 minutes. If Basso retains his form, he will surely attack,
Armstrong-style using a high cadence on a low gear, in the mountains.
Ullrich will struggle, as always, to follow sudden accelerations
and the probability is that, on current form, Basso will take more
time out of Ullrich on the mountain top finishes. Alpe d'Huez and
Morzine could be the key. As they are in the third week, it could
just be that Jan will by then have ridden himself into good enough
form to hang on. Just can't see Landis, Mayo or Leipheimer being
a threat to these two. It could be a titanic confrontation. Bring
it on!

ps re Hincapie vs Voigt, no-one seems to have suggested that Voigt
might have been acting under orders from Riis. The granting of stages
to others by the strongest team is a tradition, and Basso on the
verge of his first grand tour would have wanted to ensure he kept
his allies in the peloton should he need them. The situation with
Discovery last year, as has been pointed out, was the opposite.
Lance was in his last Tour, had no need to make alliances, no desire
to win stages himself and wanted to reward his team for 7 years
of incredible support. Voigt is probably indeed a gentleman, but
team tactics underpin everything in the pro peloton. Remember Riis,
quoted later in the race, saying "we are giving no more presents"?
I'd bet the decision not to contest the sprint was at least partly
his.

Mancebo: The Unsung Hero

In the midst of pre-Tour hysteria and the hype for every potential winner,
I feel that Mancebo has a unique talent in the mountains. Oh yes, Garzelli ,
Mayo, Cunego and Valverde are all great climbers but it takes a unique mindset
to race 10 days of the Tour before getting to those big freaks of nature known
as the Alps and the Pyrenees. Many climbers loose sight of their goals. Long
before the hills the yellow jersey seems to have slipped over the horizon. Some
of the mountain goats may try, like Rasmussen did in 2005, to have a big day
in the mountains, beating everyone by 5 or 10 minutes. Wow. Sensational. Then
the next stage arrives and it becomes inevitable that they begin to slide back
further and further. It seems impossible to have two sensational days in a row.
Two great ones perhaps, but to push it too far... You have to pay the toll sooner
or later. Measuring out your energy for the whole 3 weeks and for each day is
more difficult than the training and the mental stamina needed for a long tour.
Mancebo seems to have this key quality. I think he has the potential to grab
the podium, second place. Yes, the odds are quite high. But so many have picked
their top three for the Tour finish, and Mancebo isn't on anyone else's card.
So now he is on mine.

After all, would you be impressed, if I said I was picking Ullrich and Basso?

Hincapie to lead Disco #1

Hincapie was named one of the team leaders. There was also Savoldelli, Azevedo
and Popovych. The road will decide will be the most protected. A marketing ploy?
Race to replace is a marketing ploy, Hincapie as a leader is not. Do not forget
he came in tenth in the Dauphine and has been hanging in the mountains for the
past two years.

People are sorely mistaken if they think this team does not have any GC contenders.
I was always under the impression that this Tour plays into the strengths of
the team better than the Giro and that Savoldelli should have concentrated on
this instead. It is going to be interesting to watch this years Tour, I just
wish that they would cut down the coverage a bit to twice a day and increase
the other Grand tours in the process.

Hincapie to lead Disco #2

I agree. Without Lance the Discovery team lacks a real challenger in the Tour
this year. The American media should pay more attention to the other leading
Americans, Levi, Floyd, David, Bobby, Christian, Chris Horner, Freddy, and George
who may surprise people in his overall performance this year.

But as usual the media gets it wrong and can't see the forest for the trees!

Hincapie to lead Disco #3

If you followed the tour last year, George finished 23 minutes down. Levi and
Floyd were the only Americans besides Lance to finish ahead. Why would Discovery
and Cyclingnews make a big deal out of George, and not the other Americans?
Because he is a hell of a great rider, and now a great tour rider. It's by no
means a ploy, Discovery actually has a strong team. George is actually a strong
rider. Do you really think Discovery cares that an American finished first or
that the big sponsor name finished first? I'd say execs at Discovery are more
concerned with their big name, and not some tiny little Spaniard, Italian, Russian,
or whoever on the team wins.

No one, not Floyd, Zabriske, Horner, or George will have the marketability
of Lance. You say Lance and people know, so I don't think Discovery cares about
an American or not winning. The Discovery Channel and all its shows are seen
worldwide. George is a GC contender, he has worked hard on his TT, climbing,
and leadership. I'd say Disco is not making this a ploy for attention. I'd say
Discovery has more experience in the tour than any other team, not to mention,
more experience on GC than any other team. So Stephen, I'd say you're wrong
in your analysis about George.

By the way, where did Horner, Zabriske, and Fast Freddie finish in the Tour
last year? Oh yeah, after George. Stage one, who finished higher George or Floyd?
Stage 2, George, David or Floyd? George again. Stage 3, George listed higher
again. Goerge was also part of the TTT win, not to mention Stage 15. How many
stages did Floyd, Levi, or Freddie win last year? Give George his props, he's
earned it. As for the other Americans, hey I'd love to see the entire top 10
be all Americans.

Jane Higdon

Not all the cyclist/motor vehicle collisions are caused by uncaring/inattentive
motorists. Far too many cyclists completely disregard the rules of the road.
Some cyclists just plain ride dangerously. Worst of all, many cyclists (myself
included) occasionally impose their vulnerability on motorists to make motorists
yield their rightful right of way to the cyclist. I have been cycling (commuting,
training and recreational riding) on urban streets since 1970. In my experience,
motorists are FAR less hostile and more considerate toward cyclists now than
they were when I started riding.

Last summer, I ran a red light in front of a motorist who was coming the opposite
direction and had a green left turn arrow (as I knew from my knowledge of the
intersection.) There was plenty of space and I in no way impeded the motorist.
The guy crossed the yellow line, gunned his engine and tried his level best
to run me down! Fortunately, I am not prone to panic and made it to the sidewalk
with maybe two inches/a small fraction of a second to spare. I don't believe
running me down or risking running me down was worth him making his point, but
I got his point. Many motorists will never respect our rights as long as we,
with impunity, (1) run stop lights, (2) run stop signs at close to 100% of our
approach speed, (3) impose our vulnerability on them to wrest right of way and/or
(4) disregard the rules of the road in general.

I have come to the conclusion the solution to mixing cyclists and motor vehicles
on the same roads is one most cyclists abhor: enforcement of traffic laws against
cyclists on the same basis as enforcement against motorists. Adult cyclists
should be required to obtain cycling licenses and traffic enforcement officers
should be required to enforce the rules of the road against cyclists just as
they do against motor vehicle operators. (Motorists aren't cited for failing
to come to a complete stop at stop signs and neither should cyclists.) Cyclists
should lose the privilege of cycling if they accumulate an excessive number
of violations in a given period of time, just as motorists can lose their licenses.

I am sure the vast majority of your readers strongly disagree with this approach.
But only when we obey the rules of the road AND motorists believe we are exposed
to the same risk of fines and loss of operator privileges to which they are
exposed will a substantial majority of motorists truly respect our rights.

Jane Higdon

Rob, I feel your pain. I was one of the organisers of the wheels of justice
rally held in Adelaide after the death of Ian Humphreys. You may remember he
was killed by Eugene McGee in a hit and run. I have been thinking about improving
rider safety a lot lately and two things come to mind.

First, we have a day declared 'rider safety day' world wide. That is every
year, there is a day when motorists are reminded of their responsibilities toward
cyclists. When we as cyclists ring every talk back radio station, write to every
newspaper and get every TV station to discuss rider safety world wide. If we
all do something at least once a year, attitudes will change.

The second thing, (and I am giving up a business idea here, because I don't
know where to start) is to use technology for us. Often we don't report incidents
because we don't have the plate number or a witness. My thought is to make a
small camera, which records to a memory card on 10 or 15 minute loop, (like
a taxi camera) except the small recording device sits in your jersey pocket
and the camera fits to your helmet. Every 10 - 15 mins, you hit a button so
it starts recording again. That way if there is an incident, you don't hit the
button, the footage is kept and you have evidence to go to the police with.
As soon as motorists find out we have this device, the roads will be safer and
we will be able to report every incident, and show the law makers the true state
of road safety.

Jane Higdon

Unfortunately Rob, I can't tell you you're wrong.

There's something about being in the unnatural position of being in charge
of a ton of steel, and 100,000 watts that causes temporary psychosis, and leads
to competitive "point scoring" behaviour towards any other vehicle encountered
whether it be a 40 ton 18 wheeler, or a flesh and bone human being on a bike.

And while mistakes made by airline pilots, train drivers, and other safety-critical
occupations are investigated thoroughly, and those at fault sanctioned, over-confident,
aggressive, and deliberately intimidatory driving are all accepted by society,
and the steady toll in deaths, injury and economic losses are accepted as an
inevitable toll.

Drivers have become so used to this, that they now expect to be allowed to
behave as they like, and complain when road laws are enforced - witness the
campaign against speed cameras in the UK. Governments, and law enforcement agencies
are supine before the might of a spoiled, brattish motoring public who think
that their freedom should be unfettered, and that they should not be held accountable
for their actions.

Even when brought to court and prosecuted, lenient sentences are handed out
for the most outrageous behaviours because courts consist of a jury of 12 drivers,
presided over by a driver in a wig.

USA junior development

Like Karen Hanson, I too read the piece on Juniors and I found Hanson's comments
poignant and a little inspiring. Too bad she forgot that USAC has it's own agenda
and it only includes what they want to do. Having been involved with a fantastic
junior team run on a shoe string budget, I tried to up the ante in 2005 with
a more extensive European racing campaign. However, despite getting invites
(and funding help) to several UCI races in Belgium and Germany I hit a brick
wall of funding shortfalls and logistics after a European based sponsor pulled
out. Still, I believed that USAC would help in some way, but once again I was
dead wrong!

Actually, to his credit, Gerard Bisceglia was super helpful, but hindsight
being 20/20, I can see that no one else cared what he thought. Bottom line is
that I was told, there was no need to take anyone over to Europe, I should go
to Super Week and try to get them on the World's team; I cannot think of a bigger
waste of money. I was dumbfounded that no one would lift a finger to just make
some calls to help arrange for housing (which we would pay for). In the end
I scrapped the whole program and have moved on from junior development after
too many frustrations. However, I wrote this to send a message to someone out
there that YOU DON'T NEED USAC to race in Europe! Toby Stanton's been doing
it for years.

I just sent a rider over to Portugal this summer and have been working with
Carvalho Ciclismo to develop racing opportunities for juniors, U-23's and even
seniors. It's not free, but we hope to develop an extensive network and open
up Europe to anyone willing to take a chance. Women haven't been on my radar,
but Ms. Hansen's letter has made me rethink this as well.

Operation Puerto

Firstly, well done to the Spanish authorities for their recent operations,
which were much needed. However, the operation needs to be closed without the
daily speculation, rumours and leaks on individual riders' involvement. It is
unacceptable to run an investigation in this manner.

Authorities should be able to wrap up the investigation relatively quickly
by matching existing blood samples with DNA from the bags of blood found in
the doping complex. The remainder of the dopers should be relatively easy to
identify since a plea bargains for the first of the doctors / medical staff
/ couriers to explain the their records could be offered. Cyclists themselves
also tend to talk once the evidence of their guilt is available. This could
then be confirmed by cross referencing phone company records showing cell locations,
riders' racing calendars and bank statements. News that the investigations are
proceeding in this manner would be welcome.

Given that less than 500 cyclists globally earn enough to pay thousands of
Euros for doping, of which probably four fifths could probably be immediately
eliminated, the investigation isn't exactly looking for a needle in a haystack.

Where there is smoke, there is fire

What is happening with this "sport"? The past few months leading up to the
Tour De France have provided nothing short of a doping and allegation filled
soap opera - to say nothing of what the last 8 years have been like. I am sick
and tired of all the baggage that goes along with this sport. I never wanted
to admit that these cyclists were by and large taking all matter of performance
enhancing drugs. But when you look at everything that has happened...when you
weed through all the "botched testing methods", the Virenque epiphany, Hamilton's
vanishing twin, Operation Puerto.....it just goes on and on, but are we really
any further from the truth? I suggest we aren't. I have to admit to myself that
a spade is a spade. I am not surprised that many of these elite athletes maintain
their "innocence" despite their positive tests. The charge...the mere specter
of cheating in sport is worse than not winning at all.

No one (outside the French) remember who finishes second. We live in a world
where second place is merely first loser. The fact is that nothing seems to
be working here. If the Operation Puerto is anything to go by, doping is as
big a problem as it was at the height of the Festina affair. These guys are
simply not getting off the juice....all that is happening is that they are finding
more clever ways to mask it and then defending themselves with vigour when they
are found out. The UCI doesn't seem interested in a "single strike you're out"
policy. So why don't we try the reverse? We may as well make all drugs in cycling
legal - all of it. Sounds crazy doesn't it? We aren't getting anywhere with
the current methods - everyday there is a new scandal. If we legalized any and
all use of drugs in this sport, at very least it would level out the playing
field and also ensure that the doping that goes on does so with proper doctor
supervision. By and large, I am being sarcastic here. I would prefer the racers
to stay clean. But it is only to draw attention to how comical this whole sport
has become - it really has become a joke. I hope the cycling world gets its
act together and soon. It just doesn't have the shine it used to for me - I
suspect others feel the same.

Watching the wheels come off

What an incredible time this is to be following professional cycling. It's
been very illuminating to watch as all those "little leaks"-- Emma O'Reilly,
Ron Jongen, Jesus Manzano, the Andreus and others-- are on the verge of crumbling
the dam of secrecy surrounding the pro peloton . Thanks for both the ongoing
coverage but also the handy back-links that help us all watch the wheels come
off. As more and more of the facade falls away, more and more things make sense--
I guess it's not just the climate that makes Spain so appealing to some of the
U.S pros!

As Phil Van Valkenberg so rightly noted in his recent letter, a doper doesn't
even have to win an event to affect its outcome-- a perfectly clean cyclist
might win thanks to a doped-up domestique, and the winner himself might never
even know the truth.

If the peloton is truly as dirty as now seems likely, I can only hope that
the governing bodies will offer a general amnesty to all riders in exchange
for truthful testimony, and that as a result the testing protocols can be strengthened.
Personally, I'd love to see the whole pro peloton demand an "amnesty for honesty"
deal, even if it means threatening to boycott this year's Tour-- after all,
it's their health that hangs in the balance.

Why only cycling?

I understand that the Spanish paper has claimed that 58 cyclists are implicated
in Operacion Puerto, however I was of the understanding that about 200 athletes
had been implicated, so my question is, what about the other names? I have not
heard, in all the time since this story broke weeks ago, the mention of one
single athlete from any other sport. Is it only cycling that is subject to criticism
by the Spanish press? How can we trust a paper that breaks the law in releasing
information about a case that has yet to come to a court of law, yet expects
athletes (well cyclists anyway) to have unquestionable integrity?

Furthermore, how can we trust a police force and justice system which leaks
such information? Is the information even genuine? One thing I have learned
to my dismay over the years is that newspapers are only interested in sales,
not the truth or the law, and that most people are corruptible. In such a corrupt
world, why should any athlete feel compelled to obey the rules, when authorities
such as the police, governments and the journalists who should keep them in
check behave with such disregard for ethics? They're just not going to are they?

UCI request for riders to submit signed statements

The UCI recently requested Pro Tour riders to submit signed statements that
they are not involved with the current doping scandal being investigated by
"Operation Door" in Spain. If they are implicated in this case after submitting
a statement, they would be terminated and fined by the team. This is unfair
and probably illegal under the laws in most nations where the racing is done
or where the riders or teams reside. I doubt if this requirement is in the rider's
contracts or the UCI rule book. In the Southwestern US this sort of request
would be referred to as pure "Toro Poo Poo."

I can't think of a single group of employees that has more masters and is treated
more unfairly that professional cyclists. They need a strong union now that
represents them. Until then, each rider should be extremely careful in what
rights they give away in their contracts. Perhaps the current rider's association
could develop a contract template that riders could use.

UCI leadership questioned by reporters

Cyclingnews, June 29th:

"The general consensus of many observers in the Tour de France press room in
Strasbourg is that the UCI is not showing great leadership in the current situation,
and that it is more interested in protecting the ProTour system than getting
active in the biggest doping scandal that has shattered the sport since the
Festina affair in 1998."

I find it quite surprising that the press corps is criticizing the UCI for
its supposed lack of leadership with regards to the brewing Spanish doping scandal.
While I have no doubt that there will be considerable fallout from the scandal,
and would not at all be surprised to see some big names in the sport get taken
down, how can any non government organization, such as the UCI, do anything
to any rider so far implicated? So far, there is no "official" information that
has been published or communicated to the UCI so far as I'm aware. Its only
the press itself which has published the information. In the United States,
we believe in innocent until proven guilty...I guess in Europe its "Guilty upon
accusation," and the press corps acts as the prosecutors.

May 26 - Special edition:
Say it ain't so, Manolo, Say it isn't so, Spanish Federations' reaction to
Saiz, The doping scandal to end them all

May 19: Bettini is consistent,
Banning of altitude tents, Hypoxic tents, WADA and altitude tents, Latest
WADA crusade, WADA bans another, Congrats to Jan, Criticism of Jan Ullrich,
Jan bashing, Jan ready for the Tour, Jan's good form, Armstrong - the New
American Idol, The same old Lance, Defeatism in Discovery, Giro reactions,
One of Savoldelli's secrets, Rasmussen's time trial position, Riders under
helmets, Difference between following and leading, The Tour and the TT, Bruyneel's
Giro comments, When disqualification isn't enough

May 12: Marion Clignet, Bruyneel's
Giro comments, Criticism of Jan Ullrich, Jan bashing, Jan's weight, Defeatism
in Discovery, Lance talking up Basso, The same old Lance, Rasmussen's time
trial position, Giro team time trial, Hincapie in Paris-Roubaix, Riders under
helmets

April 28: Working for the team
in Georgia, Ullrich's thick skin, Ullrich and the 2006 Tour, Jan Ullrich racing,
Ullrich and THAT wheel, Jan Ullrich, Jan dramas, Paris-Roubaix technology,
Hincapie in Paris-Roubaix, Paris-Roubaix controversy, Paris-Roubaix comments,
Paris-Roubaix tech, Team helmets

April 21: Paris-Roubaix final
say, Paris-Roubaix controversy, Paris-Roubaix and technology, George and the
fork issue, Quotable quotes, Cycling technology, Behaving like a champion,
Paris-Roubaix: UCI Code of Ethics

April 7: Hang in there Saul,
De Ronde parcours, Edwig van Hooydonk, Discovery’s American riders, Tom Boonen,
April fools, Hair care product line, Brave new world, Commonwealth Games time
trial, Photo of the year